Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-02-2015, 06:21 AM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,901,503 times
Reputation: 3461

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by billydaman View Post
I think its important to understand that it will be unlikely you can attribute my concept of government and public policy to a political or ideological perspective. While I'll admit that I'm closer to libertarian than any other ideology I think I subscribe to concepts that are contrary to a strict libertarian philosophy. I believe morals have a place in society at the individual level. If you were to subscribe me to an ideology, it would be pragmatism based on core tenets of the Constitution. Life, liberty and Justice, with none being absolute. I do not believe I should enforce morality upon other people. Morality is not a truth.

Neither do I, in fact, I've mentioned a few times it does not really matter that taxes are theft which I'm sure you understand puts me in direct conflict with a libertarian philosophy.

I do not deny morals play a role in our law making. I do not think they should. I also do not deny there are good laws that were based on morality however I believe they are good in spite of the methodology used. In other words, you can use a flawed method for cooking stew and it could end up tasting good.
I think I understand where you're coming from a little bit more. Although, if you don't believe morals should play a role in our law making, isn't that another kindof imperative? I'm not saying you're inserting an 'immoral imperative' I'm just noticing that it's an imperative as well.

 
Old 03-02-2015, 07:52 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,770 posts, read 44,594,609 times
Reputation: 13621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
I wish that were the case.
You've already said she didn't die, going on 10 years now. That's the very definition of treatable and not terminal.
 
Old 03-02-2015, 08:00 AM
 
18,794 posts, read 8,420,430 times
Reputation: 4125
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
Hi there Hoonose,

Thanks & respect for your insights, I agree with much of what you've said here. I'd also appreciate your take on the bolded part above.

Do you think it would help to contain prices if the US could negotiate prices with the pharmaceutical industry?

According to this article:



This drug costs $84,000: And there

The whole article is interesting & uses the development of Sovaldi (used to treat Hep C) & Nexium (used to treat heartburn) to illustrate comparative costs in other Countries.
Medicare part D was too much a bow to Big Pharma. There is a great deal that can be done centrally to help with expensive but necessary drugs and useful orphan drugs. But we get into the never ending political discussions about free markets.

Some sort of central funding/partnership with Pharmas may be the way to go with drugs like Sovaldi, where there are just so many patients out there that could benefit, but obviously cannot afford it. With some central partnership it might be possible to quickly and vastly ramp up production of these sorts of miracles.

Rutuxin might be another. As I recall it was about $45K for the first year of my wife's treatment.
 
Old 03-02-2015, 09:09 AM
 
7,846 posts, read 6,389,327 times
Reputation: 4025
Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
How can it be false when it's what many countries actually do.

Germany citizens all pay (and I mean all). Pay 8% of their income (up to I think $80k) towards their health systems. Employers kick in 7.5% towards health system. UHC is regressive in itself.
We pay just as much (sometimes more) towards our privatized health care. I'd rather just take it out of payroll taxes... which assumes that payroll taxes are even required, which they aren't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
Money doesn't grow out of tree. And no. USA govt cannot simply keep printing money. It's not that simple.
Actually it does... errr... on a computer screen. The US Government can and does continue to print more money each day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
IF US dollar gets devalued than it cannot import certain goods (say oil).
Yes it can. This is also a lie because the U.S. is not dependent on foreign oil. We import and export oil on the global market for profit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
What's the USA gojng to do when it's dollar is devalued? It's not sustainable.
A devalued dollar just means we become a country with more exports. How is that not "sustainable"? You people never give a concise argument to your hyperinflation paranoia claims. It is all garbage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
You guys leave in a perfect world where everything Will work out.
No, we live in a world where we don't intentionally try to screw over poor people because of our lack of morals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
Get with reality.
I'm sitting cozy in reality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
No. My argument is that rich people and poor people alike, regardless of access to medical care or not, get sick and die from terminal cancer. Having medical care does not change that outcome.
Again, your argument is:

"Why give poor people health care? They are just going to die anyway."

 
Old 03-02-2015, 09:57 AM
 
3,599 posts, read 6,772,048 times
Reputation: 1461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated View Post
We pay just as much (sometimes more) towards our privatized health care. I'd rather just take it out of payroll taxes... which assumes that payroll taxes are even required, which they aren't.



Actually it does... errr... on a computer screen. The US Government can and does continue to print more money each day.



Yes it can. This is also a lie because the U.S. is not dependent on foreign oil. We import and export oil on the global market for profit.



A devalued dollar just means we become a country with more exports. How is that not "sustainable"? You people never give a concise argument to your hyperinflation paranoia claims. It is all garbage.



No, we live in a world where we don't intentionally try to screw over poor people because of our lack of morals.



I'm sitting cozy in reality.



Again, your argument is:

"Why give poor people health care? They are just going to die anyway."

Smack right back at you.

Poor people have qualified for Medicaid before the ACA. Even men.

Pregnant women have gotten Ob care who were poor. As evident by the close to 50% Medicaid rate of oB deliveries.

Every dialysis patient who doesn't have access to other insurance will qualify for Medicaid and often times Medicare.

Tell me how we let sick poor people die in the USA again? It's liberal propaganda.

Just like the supposedly 50 million uninsured. And it turns out 8 million households had household incomes more than $75k a year. And another 20 or million were healthy young adults who often chose to go without insirance rather than pay $100/month for comprehensive health care HSA compatible insurance (not junk either).
 
Old 03-02-2015, 10:00 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,770 posts, read 44,594,609 times
Reputation: 13621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated View Post
Again, your argument is:

"Why give poor people health care? They are just going to die anyway."
It's not about rich or poor. Rich people die anyway, too: Steve Jobs.
 
Old 03-02-2015, 10:03 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,770 posts, read 44,594,609 times
Reputation: 13621
Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
Smack right back at you.

Poor people have qualified for Medicaid before the ACA. Even men.

Pregnant women have gotten Ob care who were poor. As evident by the close to 50% Medicaid rate of OB deliveries.

Every dialysis patient who doesn't have access to other insurance will qualify for Medicaid and often times Medicare.

Tell me how we let sick poor people die in the USA again? It's liberal propaganda.
Exactly. I can't believe so many people are so stupid as to buy into that liberal propaganda BS. They're all "Grubers."

http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/...-united-states
 
Old 03-02-2015, 10:20 AM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,223 posts, read 23,643,056 times
Reputation: 38578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated View Post
If you oppose health care reform (the inferior Obamacare, or much preferred single-payer model), please list your reasons for doing so.

I oppose universal health care as a right for every American citizen because:
1.
2.
3.

Good luck.
Have you ever lived in a country that had "healthcare for all"? I have. You (general) complain about how much things cost now, just wait. It affects everything.
Why can't you foresee what will happen? Let me give you a small slice of what this type of system does. In the military, everyone gets their healthcare for free. Yay! you think. The problem? DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW LONG THE DAMN WAITING LIST IS TO GET SEEN?

Did it all get out of control and line the pockets of people? Of course it did, and yes, it did need to be redone, but this is not the answer. Whenever you have the government involved in your HEALTH, it's not a good thing. Some things government should be involved in, (not much), and some things get worse when the government involves themselves....this is one of those where it gets worse.

As for the quip about me not wanting to give up my "luxuries" for other people I don't know...WHAT FRICKEN LUXURIES? I can barely afford myself, I sure as hell can't afford other people. Take care of YOUR. SELF.
 
Old 03-02-2015, 10:31 AM
 
7,846 posts, read 6,389,327 times
Reputation: 4025
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
It's not about rich or poor. Rich people die anyway, too: Steve Jobs.
Oh but it is. We are discussing equal access to health care.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
Have you ever lived in a country that had "healthcare for all"? I have. You (general) complain about how much things cost now, just wait. It affects everything.
Why can't you foresee what will happen? Let me give you a small slice of what this type of system does. In the military, everyone gets their healthcare for free. Yay! you think. The problem? DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW LONG THE DAMN WAITING LIST IS TO GET SEEN?

Did it all get out of control and line the pockets of people? Of course it did, and yes, it did need to be redone, but this is not the answer. Whenever you have the government involved in your HEALTH, it's not a good thing. Some things government should be involved in, (not much), and some things get worse when the government involves themselves....this is one of those where it gets worse.

As for the quip about me not wanting to give up my "luxuries" for other people I don't know...WHAT FRICKEN LUXURIES? I can barely afford myself, I sure as hell can't afford other people. Take care of YOUR. SELF.
Are you stomping the ground hard enough?

Yes, people will have to wait a little longer for little Johnny to see the doctor because he has a runny nose.
 
Old 03-02-2015, 10:35 AM
 
Location: Nebraska (via Tri-Cities TN/VA)
156 posts, read 119,076 times
Reputation: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Exactly. I can't believe so many people are so stupid as to buy into that liberal propaganda BS. They're all "Grubers."

http://publichealth.gwu.edu/content/...-united-states
The Lib's are well meaning, although a bit naive in my opinion when it comes to healthcare and how to best address rising costs. I've worked in the insurance industry in risk management as an actuary since I left college...I've got a bit of an understanding on pricing for both treatment and premium. Comprehensive insurance has a weird effect on increasing costs for whatever it hopes to insure. Introducing a third party almost never drives prices down. Further...the negotiation aspect with insurers and providers encourages misuse of diagnostic tools to squeeze every dollar out of the insurers because they know the bills will be audited.

I can give you three ways right now to make HEALTHCARE, not insurance...actual CARE cost less money.

1. Most importantly...Reform EMTALA to include ONLY traumatic injury and absolve providers of malpractice for turning away certain people that don't meet a treatment threshhold. It's important that people be turned away for certain things. People shouldn't be treated at the emergency room for colds, minor auto accidents, anxiety, scrapes, muscles strains or sprains, etc. Urgent care exists in most locations in the country and it is about a tenth of the cost of an ER visit. I grew up in the boondocks of south-central Appalachian in a town of 1200 and we had an urgent care. If my town does...any town does or at least has one close. Further...hospitals wouldn't be forced to increase cost to cover for non-payment. It may sound cold...but hospitals should have the right to turn those away for services that they deem "non life threatening" or not in need of immediate medical attention.

2. Institute a federal rule on health insurance companies to include cheap catastophe plans with deductibles at $10k coupled with an HSA. Basic pricing models would indicate that a plan like this even with a covered annual checkup shouldn't cost anymore than $30/monthly. And if someone tells me they can't afford 30/monthly...then thats another problem in itself. Further...Healthcare and providers work in the same market that any other provider of a service would work, therefore their services are comparably situated to be impacted by market forces. Competition drives down prices better than central control and it keeps them lower. Obviously emergency medical treatment (heart attacks, hit by a bus, traumatic injuries) aren't subject to market forces. They are, as the name suggests, catastophes...therefore catastophe coverage would be available. That being said...the overwhelming majority of our medical expenses are minor check ups, dental work, and outpatient treatment. All of these things fail to meet the definition of "inelastic" therefore they can, and should be negotiated.

3. Work to empower non-physician medical professoinals. Often treatment at a Nurse Practicioners office is considerably less than an MD or DO. Several states have very restrictive laws on what a FNP can do. Those should be revised to allow FNP's, Chiroprators, Etc. to proceed how they choose assuming that they are licensened professionals. New York has the most restrictive laws in the country on providers yet there is no evidence to suggest it makes they healthier. It's a byproduct of lobbyist, plain and simple.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:32 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top